Khánh Linh 02

Analogous 'nakedness'

In biology, names like Bare-throated Tiger-Heron, Naked Mole Rat or Nude mouse are used to indicate that certain animal species or at least specified skin zones on them are not covered by hair (as opposed to furry species), plumage, scales etc., which is however a permanent (or cyclic, in the case of moulting) and involuntary condition of their anatomy, since man is the only species that wears (removable) clothes (not counting 'housing' like a hermit crab's seashell use). Similarly, plant names like Eriogonum nudum refer to the lack of foliage. In a genera where total exposure is the anatomical rule, a mild, in se unnotable hair growth can on the contrary suffice to justify a name like furry lobster.

Swimwear with a large amount of male skin exposure is considered less offensive and less exposing to some than mooning, quantitively barely the counterpart.

By a kink in human psychology, the act of revealing skin or even removing clothes, even when only to show another covering layer, is often regarded at least as erotic or offensive as the actual sight of bare skin. Thus one often feels the need to use a dressing-box etc. or at least retreats into a lockerroom with restricted access in order to change, even if one is already wearing underneath one's clothes the swimwear that will be shown without jeans after emerging, so not an inch of embarrassing exposure was involved in the disrobing. This very suggestive power of divesting is the basis of striptease, the very word rather referring to such a 'tease' by partial stripping off, rather than the 'full monty'.

Similarly attitudes quite like those concerning nudity are often displayed towards clothing which covers the skin, but suggestively follows the contours of a sensitive body part, such as the male genitals in tights. Wet clothing which sticks to the skin, e.g. the buttocks or a female breast (as in a wet t-shirt contest), can thus also be regarded as if it had become truly transparent.

The taboo by association can go even further: garments which prevent any exposure of strategic skin zones can themselves be given a subjective status rather fitting a revealing one, especially underwear - thus a man whose open trousers fly reveals nothing more than the color of the underwear, no skin, is nevertheless considered embarrassingly exposed. Thus euphemisms are used for undergarments, notably those in touch with the intimate parts, or even, as in the case of the word unmentionables, the trousers worn above these. The word dishabille (from the French déshabillé 'undressed', which still refers to a negligee) uses a common euphemism for nudity to refer to being partially or very casually dressed, a matter of comparison with the fashion-sensitive 'proper' dress, not to an actual revealing characteristic of the 'lesser' garments worn. In certain erotic fethisms, a second skin — which in fact covers up the real skin — is called this because it is perceived as providing a more intense stimulus than the normal response associated with real naked hide.

Finally the 'image' of nudity and the notion of vulnerability are used for various absences of clothing and other symbolical objects where no body visibility is required — thus people say they 'feel naked without...' about uniform, a badge of office, even a weapon.

Source from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki

Khánh Linh 01

Partial nudity

As the concept of nudity often refers more to perception by the observer than the mere description whether someone's body is covered or not, there can be a grey area, known as partial nudity. Thus, while someone exposing 'private parts' is often called 'naked' regardless of garments on other body parts (indeed, an 'undressed' state is even considered by some more sexually arousing than full nudity) hence the terms half-naked and, a fortiori, near-naked refer to a body that is not completely exposed, but showing more than is customary or considered quite acceptable, at least in a given context. However the quantity of skin exposed is not the determining criterion, it's the "quality" that counts for perception.

Image:Girls by the pool.jpg

Topless women by a pool.

Today even wearing boxer shorts, sufficient to guard the modesty of a shooto fighter, is described as near-naked in Japan because the appropriate kimono-type uniform associated with traditional martial arts is missing. Half-naked is also used for a degree of skin exposure that is not offensive (as no delicate zone is shown) but still barer than 'fully dressed', such as a man in bare torso. Yet for swimming the Japanese man feels comfortable in a most revealing fundoshi.

As the exposure of specific, usually intimate, skin zones suffices to be offensive and/or sensual, it is not surprising that specific terms are commonly used for such cases. More specifically:

• Terms like bare balls (not to confuse with freeballs) and bollock-naked are used to explicitly emphasize the naked exposure of the most private parts, often as a dysphemism for total male nudity, even in a context where another part of the anatomy is functionally more relevant.
• Terms like bare-butt and bare-ass or kaalgat in Afrikaans (literally 'bald [arse-]hole', also an illustration that one's own dense body hair is considered to undo or at least mitigate nudity; animal furs are probably the oldest form of warm clothing) focus only on the buttocks; apart from the literal sense (which may be functional, as in the case of a spanking) this is also a popular metaphor (also in other languages) for full nudity, at the same time more explicit than most euphemisms and yet avoiding to mention the genitals.
• The term topfree or topless is sometimes used — especially in reference to females — to describe the lack of clothing covering the breasts. For men, the same state of undress, however less strategic, is called bare chested or shirtless.
• See also cleavage (breasts) and cleavage (buttocks)
• Even a term referring to an apparently less revealing skin zone can be significant in a functional context, e.g., bare-knuckle in certain martial arts, or even sometimes have strong cultural associations, as with barefoot. In the case of bare hand(s), the expression is even commonly extended as a counterpart to handling something with gloves to protect the hands, or even with a mechanical device, whether operated manually or not, allowing to keep the hands at safe distance. The naked eye is a similar figure of speech referring to human visual perception that is unaided by optic equipment.

Source from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki